Here is a rare case of a legal malprctice/arrest of an attorney for allegedly forging a court order so that his clients would not know that he had forgotten to file and serve a summons and complaint.  Forgetting happens all the time, lying to clients sometimes, forgery rarely, arrests almost never.  The twist?  Clients not hurt!  Complaint may be served 4 years late.  The story:

"Laurence S. Jurman of Dix Hills allegedly forged the name of Supreme Court Justice William Rebolini (See Profile) to a judicial order in a civil lawsuit filed as the result of the dispute, according to a statement issued by the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office in May of this year.

On Wednesday, Mr. Jurman, 40, appearing without counsel, pleaded not guilty to a single count of criminal possession of a forged document in the second degree, a class D felony punishable by 2 1/3 to 7 years in prison. Mr. Jurman was released on his own recognizance by District Judge Paul Hensley (See Profile) and is due back to court on Nov. 19.

Mr. Jurman, who was admitted to the state bar in 1991, allegedly advised his clients, plaintiffs who were dissatisfied with the pace of their lawsuit, that Justice Rebolini on May 4 had denied a motion to vacate a nonexistent default by defendants. He subsequently supplied plaintiffs with a copy of the order purportedly signed by Justice Rebolini.

Mr. Jurman could not be reached for comment Friday night.

The background of Mr. Jurman’s arrest is spelled out in a decision handed down last month by Supreme Court Justice Edward D. Burke (See Profile) allowing the plaintiffs more time to effect service of a summons and complaint that had laid dormant since being filed four years ago.

In Yahney v. Wolforst, 16106/03, Justice Burke refused to penalize plaintiffs Jeff and Deborah Yahney for relying on Mr. Jurman.

The decision appears on page 20 of the print edition of today’s Law Journal.

"While the court acknowledges the absence of diligence and the extended length of the delay of four (4) years in effecting service upon the defendants, both of these factors are attributable solely to egregious conduct on the part of the plaintiffs’ former counsel, which this court will not impute to the plaintiffs," the judge wrote.

He said he was forwarding a copy of his order and supporting papers to the district attorney and the grievance committee of the Tenth Judicial District.

According to the decision, the Yahneys accused Joe and Orsola Wolforst of negligently building a retaining wall and berm, resulting in water damage to the Yahneys’ property due to the changed grade of their land.

Around June 2003, the Yahneys retained Mr. Jurman to sue the Wolforsts for monetary damages and a permanent injunction.

On June 10, 2003, a summons and complaint was filed in Suffolk County Supreme Court and an index number assigned. And that is where the legal process ended, Justice Burke said.

"Plaintiffs expected that the defendants would be served with the summons and complaint and that the action would proceed in the normal course," he said. "However, this action remained dormant and without any judicial intervention as the same was not initialized by the filing of a Request for Judicial Information until the interposition of this ex parte application for relief pursuant to CPLR 306-b on September 20, 2007." "